SA might run out of chicken as bird flu import row ruffles feathers
Sampa has warned that processed meat producers will soon run out of MDM because of a disagreement between South Africa and Brazil over the technicalities of lifting the ban on imports.
Outbreaks of the highly pathogenic avian influenza, commonly known as bird flu, in different parts of the world have caused a division among key players in the poultry industry, with some believing the South African government must be stricter on banning imports from the countries, while some believe that if a stricter ban is imposed, the country will suffer.
Countries that have experienced an outbreak of the bird flu include Brazil and the United States. However, some states in the two countries do not have the disease, making chicken from those states safe to eat.
South Africa gets most of its chicken from the two countries. The Department of Agriculture has taken certain steps against imports from Brazil and the US. However, the South African Poultry Association (Sapa) has criticised these steps.
ALSO READ: Bird flu: Government lifts ban on most chicken imports from Brazil
Chicken imports from the US
The department granted US authorities a concession to determine for themselves which states can export chicken to South Africa. A move that Sapa has asked the department to withdraw.
'These decisions have been taken by the Department of Agriculture, based on US notifications to the World Organisation of Animal Health (WOAH).
'However, the department has now allowed the US to self-impose and self-lift bird flu restrictions. This decision, quietly implemented three months ago with no consultation with the domestic industry, is an alarming abdication of its responsibility to defend South Africa's poultry sector,' said Izaak Breitenbach, CEO of Sapa's Broiler Organisation.
Is chicken from the US safe?
Breitenbach added that all states that produce chicken in the US have been affected, and 27 of those states are currently banned by the South African authorities from exporting poultry to this country.
He stresses that by granting the US the right to determine its own disease status and export policies, the department has created a serious conflict of interest.
'The risk is palpable: a country grappling with widespread outbreaks of bird flu can now prioritise its own interests and potentially expose South Africa to the very disease that cost this industry R9.5 billion and wiped out 30% of its long-living chicken flock in 2023.'
Reckless move
Sapa has labelled the department's decision 'reckless'.
'This is an unprecedented and reckless shift that compromises South Africa's disease-free status and threatens both food security and the future sustainability of the poultry sector.
'It sets a dangerous precedent that other large-scale poultry exporters, such as the European Union and Brazil, could soon demand the same latitude, leaving the South African poultry industry further exposed to devastating disease outbreaks,' he added.
Breitenbach emphasises that the decision poses a risk, as SA can experience an outbreak due to chicken imports from countries with the disease.
ALSO READ: Bird flu: worry not, it is safe to eat eggs and chicken
Chicken running out
The South African Meat Processors Association (Sampa) has warned that processed meat producers will soon run out of Mechanically Deboned Meat (MDM) because of a disagreement between South Africa and Brazil over the technicalities of lifting the ban on imports.
Sampa chairperson, Gordon Nicoll said this disagreement will likely result in shortages of chicken on supermarket shelves.
'Optimism had risen among besieged meat processors last week when South Africa announced that it would partially lift the ban and accept poultry and poultry products from provinces not affected by bird flu.
'But a refusal by Brazilian authorities to accept the proposed wording on South Africa's Import Health Certificate means Brazilian poultry is still unavailable to importers and manufacturers over a week later.'
MDM comes from Brazil
Nicoll highlighted that Brazil is the world's largest producer of MDM, with 95% of MDM imported over the last 12 years coming from Brazil.
MDM is used in the manufacture of polony, viennas, Russians, braai wors, bangers, frozen burgers, meat pies and corned meat, among others.
'With beef prices significantly up as well as chicken being dearer, meat and protein have become much more expensive for South Africans. 'In a country where malnutrition is a real problem and where most of the population is struggling to survive, this is catastrophic.'
NOW READ: Will SA run out of beef and chicken? Animal disease hits SA's top producer — what it means for consumers
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
6 hours ago
- The South African
Da LES breaks silence on stroke: 'I'm lucky to be alive'
Da LES – real name Leslie Mampe – has broken his silence nearly a year after suffering a stroke. The South African rapper suffered a health scare on his 39th birthday. According to reports, the 'North God' hitmaker did not have medical aid and struggled to pay for private healthcare. Mampe is currently in the US, where he is reportedly living under the care of his mother. Over the weekend, Da LES posted a YouTube video about his experience of suffering and recovering from a stroke last year. The clip featured unseen footage of the 'North God' rapper unconscious in a hospital bed, as well as clips of him learning how to become mobile again. 'People thought I was going to die, but I made it', the almost 40-year-old said. Da LES added that he was sharing his story to 'help' others. 'S**t's real. It can happen to anybody. One minute you're cool like me. The next, you experience the worst. I feel like my life has changed. But it ain't the end. This is bigger than me.' Da LES recounted how he had a stroke on his 39th birthday and woke up in the hospital a month later. He added: 'It's nothing that you can control. I'm just lucky to be alive'. According to reports, DA LES has relocated to Houston in the US after his stroke. The muso was born in America, where his mother, Priscilla Mampe currently lives. 'His mom took him with her, so she is present in his recovery, and he can get better medical care,' a source told Zimoja. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 . Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp , Facebook , X, and Bluesky for the latest news.
Daily Maverick
18 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
The why behind the surge in Christian fundamentalist hate against transgender people
Two researchers explain the disinformation tactics used by Christian fundamentalist groups to attack transgender and gender-diverse people. Christian fundamentalist organisations are tailoring deliberate anti-transgender messaging in South Africa and other African countries, framing 'gender ideology' as a form of attack on them. Why is this happening? The anti-transgender language is explicitly developed to deliver a message that transgender people are a threat to cisgender women's rights and safety, and to the family, and they disseminate that message to the public with pseudoscientific messaging. The disinformation is deliberate, designed to question the existence of transgender and gender-diverse people and justify discrimination against them. Dr Ingrid Lynch is an independent researcher and research fellow at Rhodes University with years of experience and published peer-reviewed papers about gender. In one of her reports, she notes that these groups primarily leverage religious fundamentalist narratives in two key ways: by positioning themselves as defenders of the ordained 'natural' or 'traditional' family. However, in South Africa, less than a third of families conform to this narrow two-cisgender heterosexual biological parent model. The notion of protecting the family, Lynch argues, is really about exclusion – about determining who does and does not deserve social and policy protections. 'Ultimately, this 'pro-family' messaging excludes most South African families and undermines any real support for their wellbeing,' says Lynch. Common entry points for fundamentalist groups have included opposition to comprehensive sexuality education (CSE), the rights of LGBTIQ persons and their families, and safe and legal abortion. But in recent years there has been a sharp increase in opposition to the rights of transgender and gender-diverse people, especially regarding access to gender-affirming healthcare. 'There are still people who have prejudiced ideas about homosexuality and gender diversity. But this Global North anti-trans rhetoric is not organic. It is fermented in countries like the US and UK and exported to African countries. It comes back to Christian nationalism and the far right. These movements promote a narrow vision of national identity tied to conservative religious values. 'There is a rigid idea of what a family should look like, which for so long was used against same-sex marriage and LGBTQI+ rights. That is being bolstered again to attack the rights of transgender and gender-diverse people. This very particular idea of what a family should look like, within that ideology, does not accommodate gender diversity. 'Because it is rooted in a very patriarchal system, we are seeing how the rights of not only trans women but also cisgender women are being eroded again. These groups cling to the patriarchal gender binary and the traditional view of women, often tied to white supremacist ideas about race and national identity. In the US you see it at political rallies where they talk about the great replacement theory – a conspiracy claiming that certain groups are being 'replaced' demographically – and pronatalism,' says Lynch. It is an absolute and violent reinforcement of the gender binary. Jenna-Lee de Beer-Procter, a clinical psychologist and researcher, who provides mental healthcare to transgender and gender-diverse people, says: 'Gender diversity unsettles the dominant order. In societies that are built around rigid ideas of gender, where cisgender identities are treated as natural and unchanging, the idea that gender might be fluid, self-determined or simply different is seen as threatening.' Children are not protected The typical response is 'we want to protect children' when gender-affirming care is withheld. Fundamentalist groups struggle to influence policy using straightforward religious rhetoric alone. Lynch explains that 'they undermine the rights of transgender people by targeting gender-affirming healthcare'. These groups often claim they protect the 'vulnerable' and advocate for 'exploratory psychotherapy', essentially a form of conversion therapy that has been discredited as unscientific and inhumane. 'They constantly invent new terms and distort research to justify denying transgender youth access to gender-affirming care. Pseudoscience has become one of their main tools,' says Lynch. 'If they genuinely cared about transgender and gender-diverse children, they would care about them not being discriminated against. And they would accept the fact that they exist. They want to delay care and withhold any affirmation in the hope that it will go away. This leaves a child with no support. Instead, focus on ensuring that transgender youth don't have to face bullying in schools, and on creating a sense of belonging and safety regardless of a child's gender identity. It is heartbreaking that this argument is used,' says Lynch. De Beer de Beer-Procter adds: 'The harm done is immense. When care is delayed, distress increases. When identity is doubted, trust breaks down. And when young people are forced to prove they are 'really' trans before being believed, they learn that support is conditional and that they must perform their pain in just the right way to be taken seriously. Many give up. Some are forced to seek care in unsafe or underground ways. Others simply learn to disappear. 'What gets called caution is often a refusal to see – or to listen. And while it may protect institutions or adults from feeling uncertain, it leaves trans youth alone in their pain. That's not protection. That's abandonment,' they say. Questioning gender-affirming care under the guise of 'concern' within a society which privileges cisgender people over transgender people is anything but neutral. Power is not distributed evenly when certain groups are afforded more visibility, legitimacy and safety than others – not always because they ask for it, but because systems have been built around their experiences and assumptions. Cisgender people occupy this dominant position. They are not asked to prove their identities, explain their pronouns or justify the healthcare they receive. Their gender is taken for granted as 'normal', 'natural' and the 'default'. Trans people, by contrast, are consistently positioned as questionable. De Beer de Beer-Procter explains: 'Our identities are scrutinised. Our access to care is debated. Our presence in schools, hospitals and public life is treated as controversial. In this context, so-called neutrality doesn't create balance – it reinforces stigma. And it sets back the hard-fought progress we've made in securing gender-affirming care, legal recognition and the basic right to exist without being treated as a problem to solve. What's more, the 'concern' being expressed is rarely based on accurate information. Gender-affirming care is routinely misrepresented as rushed, reckless or automatic – as though thousands of children are being hurried into life-altering decisions. 'But this is simply not true. In South Africa, access to gender-affirming care is already extremely limited. Public provision exists in only a handful of clinics, often with yearslong waiting lists. Only one public clinic in the entire country offers support to trans youth. In the private sector, trained endocrinologists, social workers and mental health professionals are few and far between – and the costs place them far out of reach for most families,' says De Beer-Procter. 'Feminists' to the rescue? Some so-called feminists are also claiming that their rights are in danger. Describing themselves as 'gender critical feminists', they don't support the rights of transgender people. Most notable is JK Rowling, with Helen Zille recently echoing similar talking points in a social media post. 'I don't call them feminists because there is nothing feminist about their views. By upholding deeply misogynistic beliefs, they become complicit in their own oppression,' says Lynch. 'They can't see how something like bathroom bans against trans women is going to hurt all women. Do we really want cisgender women to have to prove that they are 'feminine' enough to be recognised as women? Are we okay with the fact that these gender-critical groups want us to police all women, including cisgender women? They are not feminists, they are not recognising that this absolute attack on transgender women is enforcing patriarchal oppression.' Lynch stresses that protecting rights is not a competition. 'We can and should all fight for cisgender women's rights – in the workplace, in reproductive justice and to ensure safety.' She points out that globally the leading cause of physical and psychological harm to women is violence within their intimate partnerships. 'But this particular flavour of so-called feminism is rooted in whiteness, it is not intersectional. It overlooks the experiences of women facing multiple and overlapping forms of oppression, including those often marginalised within feminist spaces. They cannot see beyond their own privilege. If they could, they would look at the data and fight for the urgent issues affecting all women.' The evidence is there The claim that there's a 'lack of evidence' is one of the most common, and most misleading, arguments used to question gender-affirming care. De Beer-Procter explains: 'We have longitudinal studies, clinical audits, qualitative research and systematic reviews that all point to the same thing: gender-affirming care improves mental health outcomes, reduces distress and increases wellbeing – especially when it's timely, respectful and affirming. 'But no amount of evidence will ever feel like 'enough' to people who aren't actually looking for evidence. For many of the most vocal critics, the real issue isn't about data; it's about belief – that everyone is either male or female, that this is fixed at birth, and that it reflects some 'biological truth'. 'But that belief doesn't hold up to scrutiny. It's not supported by science, and it's certainly not reflective of lived reality. 'We've known for decades that sex and gender are far more complex than two boxes on a form. Intersex people exist. Trans and non-binary people exist. Cultures all over the world have recognised more than two genders for centuries, says De Beer-Procter. So, when anti-trans groups demand 'proof', what they're often doing is moving the goalposts. They dismiss rigorous studies for not being perfect. They discredit researchers for being too close to the communities they study. And they ignore the overwhelming consensus from major medical bodies around the world. Because what's actually being defended isn't science, it's a worldview. A belief that gender diversity is a deviation rather than a natural part of human variation, and one that fuels disinformation and fear across borders. DM
IOL News
2 days ago
- IOL News
Ignoring sexual health costs South Africa $34bn, and counting
South Africa's failure to adequately invest in sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) for young people is costing the nation a staggering $33.7 billion. Image: Lebohang Mashiloane/Supplied A DAMNING new report by UNAIDS revealed that South Africa's failure to adequately invest in sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) for young people was costing the nation a staggering $33.7 billion (about R599bn) over a cohort's lifetime, equivalent to 10.1% of the country's annual gross domestic product (GDP). The report, titled The Cost of Inaction and funded by the Swedish government, painted a grim picture of how policy failures in adolescent health were creating long-term economic consequences that far outweigh the costs of intervention. The numbers told a devastating story. South Africa's cost of inaction on youth SRHR exceeded the country's entire annual education budget and was more than double its health budget. 'For every R100 spent in the country over a year, the cost of inaction on youth SRHR is equivalent to R8 in financial outlays paying for the effects of the lack of SRHR services, or opportunity costs of future value and income foregone,' the report stated with alarming clarity. This economic burden manifested across three critical areas: early pregnancy, HIV transmission, and gender-based violence (GBV) — each creating ripple effects that extended across generations. The report revealed that one in three South African girls who would fall pregnant during adolescence dropped out of school, with catastrophic consequences for their earning potential. A girl who completed secondary school would earn 3.1 times more annually than one who dropped out, creating a lifetime earnings gap of about $150 198 per individual at present value. The situation was particularly dire because adolescent mothers faced multiple disadvantages. 'They are less likely to complete secondary school and more likely to have a higher fertility rate, with more negative health outcomes,' the report stated. The children of teenage mothers also suffer, being more likely to experience poor health, educational challenges, and economic hardship, perpetuating intergenerational cycles of poverty. The Health Department confirmed receipt of questions from the Sunday Independent, but did not respond by the time of compiling this report. The Department of Social Development also did not respond to questions by the time of compiling this report. While the UNAIDS report highlights significant gaps and costs associated with inaction, it is important to note that the South African government has, in recent years, made substantial new investments in health and social development, particularly since the 2025/26 national budget. In May this year, Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana announced that the total health budget would rise from R277bn in 2024/25 to R296bn in 2025/26, with a projected increase to R329bn by 2027/28. This expanded allocation is specifically aimed at strengthening public health infrastructure, improving access to chronic medications, and addressing critical staffing shortages. Notably, an additional R20.8 billion over three years is being used to employ 800 post-community service doctors and 9 300 healthcare professionals in public hospitals and clinics, a move intended to address the chronic shortage of medical staff and improve service delivery in underserved areas. Further, more than R6 billion has been allocated for strategic health infrastructure projects, including the construction and refurbishment of hospitals and allied health facilities, with the aim of reducing disparities in access to tertiary care. The government is also maintaining and increasing funding for the central chronic medication dispensing and distribution programme, which now benefits an estimated 40% of antiretroviral treatment (ARV) clients by improving access to chronic medications through alternative pick-up points. In addition, R9.9bn has been earmarked for the rollout of National Health Insurance (NHI), reinforcing the government's commitment to universal health coverage and improved access to essential health services. While South Africa had made progress in HIV treatment, the disease continued to take a heavy toll on young people, particularly adolescent girls and young women who accounted for a disproportionate share of new infections. The lifetime cost of HIV for young South Africans aged 15-24 totalled $11bn, with young women bearing the brunt at $8.2bn compared to $2.7bn for young men. 'A delayed HIV diagnosis results in the delayed start of antiretroviral therapy, with negative impacts on a person's health and higher long-term treatment costs,' the report cautioned. The economic impact extended beyond healthcare, as people living with HIV faced reduced productivity and earning potential. Perhaps most shocking were the figures on GBV, which cost South Africa $12.4bn per cohort of young women aged 15-24. This includes direct costs to survivors ($11bn), government expenses ($224 million), civil society costs ($387m), and business impacts ($796m). 'GBV has serious consequences for women's physical health, as well as their sexual and reproductive health and mental health,' the report found. 'It is also a fundamental violation of women's human rights and has adverse economic and social consequences for men, women, their children, families and communities.' The report highlighted how GBV intersected with other issues — survivors were at higher risk of HIV infection, and women with less education faced greater vulnerability to violence. 'The prevalence of physical violence was greater among less educated women than those with secondary education or higher,' the report noted, drawing on 2016 Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) data. Health sector experts, including researchers from the South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC), have acknowledged that the 2025 budget boost signals a government that is responding to dire public health needs, particularly for the more than 80% of the population reliant on public health services. They highlight the increased investment in human resources for health, early childhood development, and social grants as positive steps. However, they also stress the need for strong accountability measures and efficient translation of these funds into improved health outcomes. Despite these substantial investments, experts and civil society organisations continue to call for further improvements, including enhanced accountability, more robust monitoring and evaluation, and greater focus on addressing the root causes of health disparities. The government itself has acknowledged these challenges and has committed to ongoing reforms and targeted spending to address them. The report identified several critical areas where government action (or inaction) was exacerbating these problems: The Education-Health Divide: A persistent lack of coordination between the health and education sectors undermined efforts to provide comprehensive sexuality education (CSE). 'This divide needs to be overcome so high-quality, evidence-based, comprehensive sexuality education can be provided both in and out of school to young people,' the report stated. A persistent lack of coordination between the health and education sectors undermined efforts to provide comprehensive sexuality education (CSE). 'This divide needs to be overcome so high-quality, evidence-based, comprehensive sexuality education can be provided both in and out of school to young people,' the report stated. Inaccessible Youth-Friendly Services: Despite legal provisions allowing adolescents to access contraception, many faced judgmental healthcare providers. 'Health care providers believe that young women should not be having sex before marriage,' the report found, leading to limited contraceptive options and missed opportunities for prevention. Despite legal provisions allowing adolescents to access contraception, many faced judgmental healthcare providers. 'Health care providers believe that young women should not be having sex before marriage,' the report found, leading to limited contraceptive options and missed opportunities for prevention. School Retention Failures: While policies existed to allow pregnant learners to remain in school, implementation was inconsistent. 'Only a few schools have formal or effective mechanisms in place to offer opportunities for girls to catch up on missed work,' the report noted, with 33% of pregnant girls not returning to school. The report outlined clear, actionable solutions that would more than pay for themselves through economic benefits: Integrated SRHR Services: Combining HIV prevention, contraception, and GBV services in youth-friendly spaces could dramatically reduce costs. The report highlighted successful models such as the O3 Programme that linked schools with health services. Combining HIV prevention, contraception, and GBV services in youth-friendly spaces could dramatically reduce costs. The report highlighted successful models such as the O3 Programme that linked schools with health services. Comprehensive Sexuality Education: 'School-based CSE, when delivered effectively using engaging and interactive game-based methods, empowers young people to make informed decisions about relationships,' the report stated. This required proper training for educators and collaboration with health providers. 'School-based CSE, when delivered effectively using engaging and interactive game-based methods, empowers young people to make informed decisions about relationships,' the report stated. This required proper training for educators and collaboration with health providers. Economic Support for Young Parents: Programmes that helped adolescent parents complete their education, including childcare support and flexible schooling, could recover millions in lost earnings potential. The report cites Nacosa's successful peer education and remedial teaching initiatives. Programmes that helped adolescent parents complete their education, including childcare support and flexible schooling, could recover millions in lost earnings potential. The report cites Nacosa's successful peer education and remedial teaching initiatives. GBV Prevention Investments: Community-based programmes such as Stepping Stones and Sonke Gender Justice's One Man Can campaign have proven effective at changing harmful gender norms. The report called for scaling these interventions alongside clinical services for survivors. The report's conclusion was unequivocal: 'Business as usual is not going to work. Different approaches are needed to generate change.' It challenged policymakers to view SRHR not as an expense, but as an investment with measurable economic returns. 'Understanding the cost of inaction helps to re-evaluate current approaches,' the report stated. 'Costing activities, including the cost of inaction in the cost-benefit analysis, will enable appropriate investment decisions for activities that provide real change, both now and also in the health and economic livelihoods of the next generations.' For South Africa, the choice is clear: continue paying the astronomical costs of inaction, or invest strategically in the health and rights of young people to unlock their full economic potential. The numbers show there's only one fiscally responsible option. Get the real story on the go: Follow the Sunday Independent on WhatsApp.
